Southern standard. (McMinnville, Tenn.) 1879-current, 1887-12-10
Revenue Reduction.
Philadelphia Times.

Revenue reduction is an imperious
necessity. 1t is not mere political
necessity: it is an absolute business
necessity. The commerce, industry
and trade of the nation cannot be con-
Quoted another year with an annual
surplus revenue ofnearly 800, 600, 900.
The vast and varied business opera
lions Of the country would be hope
iessly crippled with two or three hun
dred millions Of the money of the ma
ton boarded up in the Treasury, and
there is now no method within the
discretionary power of the Govern
ment to transfer surplus money into
business channels. The last bonds
which could be anticipated in pay
ment have been redeemed, and the
accumulated money of the Treasury
must now remain there unless divert
ed back into business channels by
Congress. We narrowly escaped a
financial panic only few months
ago, and if revenue reduction shall
not be effected, eighty or a hundred
dred millions more shallbedrawnfrom
business to be boarded in the Treas.
ury, escape from panic and general
financial distress next year will be
impossible.
We regard tariff revision and rev.
enue reduction as entirely within
reach during the coming session Of
Congress, and we believe that tariff
revision on basis that can give ne
reasonable cause for alarm to our in
dustries, will be supported by Speak
er Carlisle. 1t is not pretended tina
he has changed his views of the tar
if policy the country should adopt
but it is fair to assume that he is Wis.,
enough to know that tariff revision
and revenue reduction are 80 vita
that all patriotic statesmen must ia
vor:them even fit involves the failur,
of much that they would be glad t
accomplish. Every reduction of tn,
tariff that Speaker Carlisle can attain
is so much for revenue reform from
his own standpoint, and he well I'm
derstands that free trade, or tariff re
vision on any free trade basis, is sim
ply impossible.
Mr.. Carlisle would reduce our rev
enues wholly by tariff reduction if h
could have his theory adopted by tn
Government; Mr.. Randall woul'
reduce revenues wholly by the repea
Of internal taxes if he could enforc
his views or the true revenue polio,
of the nation; but Congress will nc
accept the views of either, and tn
practical question is whether indis
pensable revenue reduction shall fai
because of the abstract theories {
leaders. Mr.. Randall can consistent
ly favor any measure of revenue IT
duction that does not take q depart
ure from the policy of protecting Ii
Dor; Mr.. Carlisle can consistently fl
vOr any measure that eliminates me-
nopoly and oppressive features fror
the existing tariff and that enlarge
the free list and there is no reaso
why revenue reduction should nc
come by the cordial cooperation {
Carlisle and Randall in both tart
and internal revenue reduction. Fc
such leaders to bubble over extrem
views, when the cry of the cOuntr
is for revenue reduction, would
unworthy of the craftsmanship the
both justly claim.
The apprehension of the protectio
Democrats that they were going
Washington to meet a free trade Sc
up fashioned by Mr.. Carlisle and oil
ers, with the active or passive assel
ofthe President, has persisted befol
thepublicly declared fact that neitht